Extend supported Parent Types for Services to include IPAM > IP Addresses #11346

Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:43:58 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
Owner

Originally created by @rboucher-me on GitHub (Jul 3, 2025).

NetBox version

v4.3.3

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

This request is to extend the currently supported Parent Types for Services to support IPAM > IP Addresses. Currently, the following Parent Types are supported:

Image

Use case

This capability would allow results from network port scans (from tools such as Nmap) to be modelled in NetBox by associating the active IP Addresses to the discovered open ports ("Services"). Currently, these associations require a parent Device (or FHRP Group, or VM) and don't allow modelling of services for all active IP Addresses.

Database changes

No identified database changes.

External dependencies

No identified external dependencies

Originally created by @rboucher-me on GitHub (Jul 3, 2025). ### NetBox version v4.3.3 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality This request is to extend the currently supported Parent Types for Services to support IPAM > IP Addresses. Currently, the following Parent Types are supported: ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5253bbc4-da03-4bc2-bb4b-55abaed480b7) ### Use case This capability would allow results from network port scans (from tools such as Nmap) to be modelled in NetBox by associating the active IP Addresses to the discovered open ports ("Services"). Currently, these associations require a parent Device (or FHRP Group, or VM) and don't allow modelling of services for all active IP Addresses. ### Database changes No identified database changes. ### External dependencies No identified external dependencies
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 21:43:58 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:43:58 +01:00
Author
Owner

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025):

Closing per our discussion earlier; we'll explore alternative approaches for the use case.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025): Closing per our discussion earlier; we'll explore alternative approaches for the use case.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#11346